STATE OF MEGHALAYA Vs. JITENDRA THAKUR

JUDGEMENT

(1.) It is fairly submitted by the appellants and the individual respondents that the common judgment impugned dated July 19, 2017 has dealt with only one aspect of the matter, pertaining to the rights of reserved category candidates who secure higher marks than the lowest-placed candidates in the unreserved category to be considered as unreserved candidates, irrespective of having applied as reserved category candidates.

(2.) The issue is no longer open for discussion. It is now judicially determined that when a reserved category candidate secures higher marks than the lowest placed unreserved category candidate, such meritorious reserved category candidate would be considered as an unreserved category candidate. Though it is unnecessary to elaborate, it may suffice to appreciate that the reason behind this is that in the event there is no reservation, the relevant meritorious reserved category candidate would have qualified for the position. As such, in furtherance of the policy of affirmative action, a meritorious reserved category candidate of the kind indicated above would be considered as an unreserved category candidate.

(3.) Since the impugned judgment holds to the contrary, the same cannot be accepted. The parties agree that the impugned judgment and order be set aside. However, the writ petitioner-respondents say that other issues were raised in the writ petitions which were not dealt with by the Single Bench in the light of the judgment dealing with the aforesaid aspect of the matter.